Transparency in Reporting on Anti-Corruption (TRAC) is survey carried out by Transparency International (TI). It was carried out first time 2009,
assessed 500 leading global companies reports on strategy, policies and management systems they have in place for combating bribery and corruption. With TRAC, TI aims to encourage companies to adopt and make public the measures they have put in place to discourage corrupt practices and promote high standards of company reporting on integrity and anti-corruption measures. [1]
2009 TRAC Report
The results from the first TRAC report show that on average, leading companies still have a long way to go in demonstrating that they are embedding anti-corruption practices into their organizations. 500 of the world’s largest publicly traded companies were analyzed. They were chosen from Forbes ranking of the largest 2000 global listed companies (March 2007) by choosing: 250 largest companies, 107 additional companies from higher risk sectors; oil & gas, aerospace & defense, forestry & mining and telecommunications and as 143 additional companies from each of the 25 largest global exporting nations. The company names were not published. The average score for the complete sample was two stars, highest standard being five stars. At the top end of the scale were Canada, USA, Netherlands and Switzerland - among the weakest China, Taiwan and Russia. Figure shows only countries with more than 10 companies evaluated by TRAC; from Finland only 4 companies were chosen to participate. Only 15 companies reported substantial anti-corruption policies. The remainder of the leaders still have considerable room to improve in their reporting. They need to be encouraged to progress further. [1]
2012 TRAC Report
The last report is a survey of the world’s 105 largest multinational companies taken from a list published by Forbes in 2010. It assesses the publicly available information on those companies in three different areas related to corporate reporting: anti-corruption programs, organizational transparency and country-by-county reporting. Three companies, all based in Europe, achieved maximum possible scores; BASF, BG Group and Statoil. Generally survey indicates a positive trend since TI’s 2009 report. The bottom of the ranking is occupied by two Chinese Banks and Russian state-controlled oil and gas company Gazprom.
Based on that report, TI has formulated the following policy recommendations to MNCs: Anti-corruption programs should be publicly available; public reporting on anti-corruption increases credibility and accountability. Companies should publish lists of their subsidiaries, affiliates, joint-ventures and other related entities. Furthermore, MNCs should publish individual accounts for each country of operations. [2]
Reporting of corruption in the EU
The European Commission’s (EC) survey (2007) ”The attitudes of Europeans towards corruption” states that 25% of Finns agree corruption being a major problem in Finland, while in Greece 80%, Romania 75%, Hungary 73% and Bulgaria 72% of respondents totally agree that corruption is a major problem. [3]
The European Commission estimates that €120 billion is lost to corruption each year in the EU. Transparency International calls on MEPS to set new standards of integrity and transparency over the next five years. Only 13% of all MEPs have signed the Transparency International EU Anti-Corruption Pledge, committing to greater integrity and transparency in EU law-making, prevention of corruption in EU.funding and better protection of whistleblowers.[4]
Only 30% of Finnish MEPs have signed this; Sirpa Pietikäinen (Kok), Anneli Jäättenmäki (Kesk.), Merja Kyllönen (Vas.) and Heidi Hautala (Vihr.) [5] Transparency International published report as the result of research conducted across 10 EU institutions 2013-2014. EU institutions are vulnerable to corruption due to loopholes and poor enforcement of rules on ethics, transparency and financial control. 70 % of the public believe that corruption is present in the institutions. [6]
Healthcare Reports
EC's report says that healthcare - and specifically pharmaceutical industry - ranks being the most vulnerable to corruption in public procurement.
Bribery conserning healthcare sector was a particular consern in countries such as Hungary, Slovakia and Poland. [7]
In December 2013 The European Commision imposed 16 million fines for Johnson & Johnson and Novartis for delaying entry of a cheaper version of generic painkiller fentanyl in the Netherlands. Fentanyl is a pain-killer 100 times more potent than morphine. It is used notably for patients suffering from cancer. [8]
European Commission's study on corruption in the healthcare sector, released 2013, reports that in Finland "old boys networks" and conflicts of interest are typical for a small country; mentioned by interniewees were also embezzlement, trading in influence, revolving door, clientelism, nepotism and favourism. People can have multiple roles, e.g. adminstrators and experts, and the roles may be confounded. The relationship between medical equipment and pharmaseutical buyers and purchasers are close, which bears a risk for revolving doors. A special problem is the leading role of pharmaseutical companies in the continuing education of physicians. [9]
^ European Commission, 2013, 12/10, Antitrust: Commission fines Johnson & Johnson and Novartis € 16 million for delaying market entry of generic pain-killer fentanyl [Homepage of European Commission Press Release Database], [Online]. Available: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-1233_en.htm [11/22, 2014].
Definition
Transparency in Reporting on Anti-Corruption (TRAC) is survey carried out by Transparency International (TI). It was carried out first time 2009,assessed 500 leading global companies reports on strategy, policies and management systems they have in place for combating bribery and corruption. With TRAC, TI aims to encourage companies to adopt and make public the measures they have put in place to discourage corrupt practices and promote high standards of company reporting on integrity and anti-corruption measures. [1]
2009 TRAC Report
The results from the first TRAC report show that on average, leading companies still have a long way to go in demonstrating that they are embedding anti-corruption practices into their organizations. 500 of the world’s largest publicly traded companies were analyzed. They were chosen from Forbes ranking of the largest 2000 global listed companies (March 2007) by choosing: 250 largest companies, 107 additional companies from higher risk sectors; oil & gas, aerospace & defense, forestry & mining and telecommunications and as 143 additional companies from each of the 25 largest global exporting nations. The company names were not published. The average score for the complete sample was two stars, highest standard being five stars. At the top end of the scale were Canada, USA, Netherlands and Switzerland - among the weakest China, Taiwan and Russia. Figure shows only countries with more than 10 companies evaluated by TRAC; from Finland only 4 companies were chosen to participate. Only 15 companies reported substantial anti-corruption policies. The remainder of the leaders still have considerable room to improve in their reporting. They need to be encouraged to progress further. [1]2012 TRAC Report
The last report is a survey of the world’s 105 largest multinational companies taken from a list published by Forbes in 2010. It assesses the publicly available information on those companies in three different areas related to corporate reporting: anti-corruption programs, organizational transparency and country-by-county reporting. Three companies, all based in Europe, achieved maximum possible scores; BASF, BG Group and Statoil. Generally survey indicates a positive trend since TI’s 2009 report. The bottom of the ranking is occupied by two Chinese Banks and Russian state-controlled oil and gas company Gazprom.Based on that report, TI has formulated the following policy recommendations to MNCs: Anti-corruption programs should be publicly available; public reporting on anti-corruption increases credibility and accountability. Companies should publish lists of their subsidiaries, affiliates, joint-ventures and other related entities. Furthermore, MNCs should publish individual accounts for each country of operations. [2]
Reporting of corruption in the EU
The European Commission’s (EC) survey (2007) ”The attitudes of Europeans towards corruption” states that 25% of Finns agree corruption being a major problem in Finland, while in Greece 80%, Romania 75%, Hungary 73% and Bulgaria 72% of respondents totally agree that corruption is a major problem. [3]The European Commission estimates that €120 billion is lost to corruption each year in the EU. Transparency International calls on MEPS to set new standards of integrity and transparency over the next five years. Only 13% of all MEPs have signed the Transparency International EU Anti-Corruption Pledge, committing to greater integrity and transparency in EU law-making, prevention of corruption in EU.funding and better protection of whistleblowers.[4]
Only 30% of Finnish MEPs have signed this; Sirpa Pietikäinen (Kok), Anneli Jäättenmäki (Kesk.), Merja Kyllönen (Vas.) and Heidi Hautala (Vihr.) [5] Transparency International published report as the result of research conducted across 10 EU institutions 2013-2014. EU institutions are vulnerable to corruption due to loopholes and poor enforcement of rules on ethics, transparency and financial control. 70 % of the public believe that corruption is present in the institutions. [6]
Healthcare Reports
EC's report says that healthcare - and specifically pharmaceutical industry - ranks being the most vulnerable to corruption in public procurement.Bribery conserning healthcare sector was a particular consern in countries such as Hungary, Slovakia and Poland. [7]
In December 2013 The European Commision imposed 16 million fines for Johnson & Johnson and Novartis for delaying entry of a cheaper version of generic painkiller fentanyl in the Netherlands. Fentanyl is a pain-killer 100 times more potent than morphine. It is used notably for patients suffering from cancer. [8]
European Commission's study on corruption in the healthcare sector, released 2013, reports that in Finland "old boys networks" and conflicts of interest are typical for a small country; mentioned by interniewees were also embezzlement, trading in influence, revolving door, clientelism, nepotism and favourism. People can have multiple roles, e.g. adminstrators and experts, and the roles may be confounded. The relationship between medical equipment and pharmaseutical buyers and purchasers are close, which bears a risk for revolving doors. A special problem is the leading role of pharmaseutical companies in the continuing education of physicians. [9]
Related links
World Bank Corruption IndexBribe Payers Index
Corruption measurements
Global witness